There is one program I have used for several years on every single Apple I have ever owned; iStat Menus. It was a free program that offered some extremely useful information about the status of your computer at any given moment. It was recently updated to version 3.0, and now costs $16. The amount is minimal, especially considering how much useful it is. However, I won’t be updating or purchasing the software anytime soon.

It’s not that I’m cheap, and it’s not that I don’t think the program warrants $16 of my hard earned dollars. It does, and I miss using the program. The reason I won’t be purchasing the software is much more basic; I don’t trust iSlayer’s website with my credit card information.

This same argument applies to the developers of Instapaper Pro, Angry Birds, Jungle Crash Land, Word Droppings, and all of the other apps I’ve purchased from the App Store. I don’t trust them with my credit card information. If it wasn’t for the App Store, I never would have purchased their apps from their own website. Ever!

So to the complaining developers, pipe-down. Apple is offering you something incredible. An entire commerce system complete with customers, credit card transactions, advertising, statistics, and most importantly, trust.

Files, Folder, and Organization
I have used iTunes for several years now and in that time I have become accustomed to managing my music through software as opposed to file explorers. One of the first things I do when I install iTunes is ensure that iTunes is set to “Keep iTunes Folder Organized.” This ensures that my music is kept intact, in nicely organized folders, and that my file names reflect the actual titles of the songs. Zune offers none of this. Absolutely none. You can change the track title, artist, track number, etc through the software, but that song will remain in its original location with its original file name. This makes everything from backing up files to finding the files on the local disk a tiresome process. Consistency is key, and the Zune has absolutely none when it comes to file management.

I should note that when you purchase songs from the Zune Marketplace they are kept in the standard /ARTIST/ALBUM/SONG file format. This proves that the Zune *can* organize files, it just chooses not to organize *your* files.

Also, Zune offers the option to monitor a folder for you, something iTunes doesn’t offer. So if you don’t mind doing some file management, you can set Zune to monitor a specific folder and anything you add to that folder will be added to your collection.

Winner: iTunes.

The Miracle of Meta data
When it comes to managing music files, meta data is key. Everything from album art, to song titles, to albums, to track numbers, to year, is all kept in the meta data. Both iTunes and Zune offer methods of managing meta data, but in different ways and with different approaches.

iTunes: Simply put iTunes offers access to more meta data than the Zune. Going into a song via iTunes grants you access to standard info such as artist, song title, year, album name, and album artist. In addition, it also grants you access to comments, bpm, grouping, and total tracks for that album. That last item I use often as I like knowing I am listing to song 4 of 12 as opposed to simply 4. A small nitpick I know, but an important one to me personally. The Zune offers no access to comments, bpm, grouping or total tracks information.

Zune: Even though the Zune has access to less meta data, updating the meta data you do have access to is a much simpler and complete process. You can still edit individual songs manually via a right-click like iTunes, but Zune takes the entire process one step further by allowing you to update the entire albums meta data with one-click (sort of). Right-clicking on an album allows you to search for album information (meta data). Once you find the album, Zune allows you to pick via a drop-down menu which song goes with which title. Once you’re satisfied, you click finished and the Zune updates all of the meta data for that album including the album art. Nice touch!

The Zune also has an option to automatically find album information and update the meta data. You can set it to add only the missing information, or update all of the information to ensure it is consistent. In my limited experience, this service works extremely well, finding song information, artist information, album information, and album art. iTunes can automatically find album art, but you’re left on your own to ensure the song titles, album artists, track numbers and years are correct.

I also want to note that while the Zune does not allow you to access the meta information Comments or Total Tracks, it does alter this information. As the Zune software is indexing the songs, it removes the total track information and adds a string of odd characters (00000304 000004DC …) to the comments section. This information is edited even if you have opted to NOT have Zune update information automatically.

Winner: Zune.

Dude, I Love this Song!
Another key feature of music management is ratings, and this is one area where the Zune looses with flying colors. While iTunes offers the ability to rate songs on the standard 5 star scale, Zune uses a heart system. What is a heart system you ask? Exactly! Nobody knows what the heart system is and it is NOT intuitive.

I played around with it a bit, and here is what I understand about it. Zune basically has a 3 star system, allowing you to declare that you either 1) Hate a song, 2) have no opinion, or 3) Love a song. That’s it. I find this method insufficient since liking a song does not mean I love the song and I need to be able to differentiate between the two. Similarly there are songs I don’t particularly like but like to listen to every once in a great while, and then there are songs I hate and never want to hear again.

For an example of what I mean, read my post on iTunes Smart-Playlists and how they can help you love your collection even more.

Winner: iTunes.

He who Plays, Wins
For starters, both software packages play music, and both sound good. But I’m not interested in the fact *that* they play music, I want to know *how* they play music.

iTunes: There is a myriad of options for playing back your music via iTunes. You can build smart playlists, build normal playlists, shuffle (from one album to your entire collection), alter the sound (via equalizer), crossfade your music, and have iTunes automatically determine the best level to play it at so your music has a consistent sound.

In addition, iTunes has some added bonuses that I really love. The first is Party Shuffle. The ability to add songs to a queue as well as tell iTunes to shuffle your music based on a smart playlist is a huge benefit. Secondly, iTunes offers the ability to play in full screen mode via cover flow while still offering the ability to rate songs. This last ability is incredibly handy as it prevents your computer’s screen saver from kicking on.

Zune: In comparison to iTunes, when it comes to playback the Zune software is extremely limited. You can play an album, play an artist, shuffle (from one album to your entire collection), but that’s about it. There is no equalizer to change the sound of the music, there is no full screen playback, there is no queue to have a controlled shuffle, there is no option to crossfade songs, nor is there an option to have Zune keep your music sound level consistent. Also, the Zune’s smart playlist feature gives you less options to choose from than iTunes.

I will add that the Zune’s now playing screen is fantastic and a step above what iTunes offers. When you’re playing a song the now playing screen shuffles through different high-res pictures and offers some interesting stats on the artist. Unfortunately, this cannot be played back full-screen and is only available for a short selection of artists (this second point will eventually be a non-issue as they add more information).

Winner: iTunes.

Conclusion
While the Zune is a decent program with class A meta data management, it simply falls short is comparison to iTunes and its top-notch playback options and file management. Fortunately the problems are small and could be easily addressed by the Zune team.

* For the ultra-brave, I’ve noticed that you can use both programs to get everything. You set Zune to monitor your iTunes folder and have it automatically update album information. Zune will perform these actions in the background, and once iTunes attempts to play the song it will read the new meta information and display it in iTunes. However, this is not a fool proof plan so use with extreme caution.

1. Focus:
   In the year I have been using my Mac, I cannot recall a single time when an application has ever stolen the focus of my machine. On Windows, applications steal focus about once a day. If you are not familiar with what I am talking about, think about how many times you have been writing a Word document only to have Internet Explorer jump into focus to warn you that a download is done, or a secure connection is expiring, or a page cannot load. This type of focus theft often results in lost productivity as key strokes are lost in the transition and you have to reread what was written and determine what went missing.

   On my Macintosh, this attention theft has yet to happen. Firefox (or Safari) never jumps in front of Word to warn me about a page not loading. In fact, no application ever steals focus to warn me about anything. The closest my Macintosh has come is to have the applications icon bounce around at the bottom of the screen. This can be a bit distracting, but it never steals key strokes or causes me to lose my focus.

2. Shortcuts:
   Other than your basic shortcuts for Copy/Paste/Cut, I was never a big fan of shortcut keys on Windows. Now I am beginning to understand why; they lack consistency. With my Macintosh, I can quit any application with Apple-Q. If I want to close just the in-focus window but not the entire application, Apple-W will accomplish that. Need to minimize the window, just hit Apple-M and it is done. And those shortcuts are consistent across all applications. Of course some applications have app specific shortcuts, but the basics are always the same.

   On Windows, it does not always work so cleanly. So while you hit Alt-F-C to quit Windows Explorer, you need to hit Alt-F-X to quit Internet Explorer. From my experience, most programs alternate between Alt-F-C and Alt-F-X, but the level of effort required to memorize which apps use which shortcuts typically leads to frustration and abandonment of shortcuts entirely. The end result is that more time is spent navigating the mouse through the necessary menu items than is truly warranted.

3. Shortcuts without Focus:
   The only feature I have found more useful than the above two mentioned, is the combination of the two. On both Windows and Mac you can change which program you are focused on by either hitting Alt-Tab (Windows) or Apple-Tab (Macintosh). The difference, on Macintosh you can hit Apple-Tab to change the focus, and then before letting go of the Apple key, hit Q to Quit the application. You never have to look at the actual application to close out of it. I will refrain from giving specifics, but I am sure you can think of a few instances when this ability could come in, handy.

So there you have it. Three little time-saving features that the Macintosh has, that Windows simply lacks. Can you think of some additional ones?

Naturally, I found myself at the Apple Store looking for a Nano replacement. I knew my screen could not be fixed, but the lady wanted to ask, so she inquired to see if the screen could be fixed. As expected, she was informed that the screen could not be fixed easily or cheaply. What I did not expect however, was to find out that I could get a 10% discount on a new iPod if I gave them my broken one. According to the Apple guy, with Apple’s Replacement Program, you can get a 10% discount on new iPods by giving them your old iPod. That is a good deal, and I am a fan.

So what is the moral (or point) of this post? To let you know that if you have an old iPod lying around, or if you are due for an upgrade, make sure you get your 10% discount when purchasing an new one. Me? I walked out of the store with a new silver Nano and transparent hard case in my coat pocket and a lot less money in my bank account. Grrr.

Now before I really get into why I think that, let me say that I am aware that the point of the device is to combine the iPod and cell phone. I get that. And I think it is generally a smart move. I just think Apple did it badly. OK, now lets get into it what is wrong with this device.

[So what's included in the package?]
The first problem I have with the iPhone is its ‘includes.’ What this means is that when you purchase the device it includes a phone, includes an iPod, and my personal favorite, includes service with Cingular (this may change in the future, but they said multi-year agreement…). These are all non-negotiable items that you get when you purchase the device whether you want them or not. So if you want just a wide-screen touch sensitive iPod, or if you just want an ultra-portable Macintosh computer, sorry, you’re out of luck. You get them all. Take it or leave it.

Now I know there are people out there that want an iPhone. I know this. However, I truly believe there are more people out there who want the device sans-phone. This could be because they are locked into a different carrier but want a new iPod, or perhaps because they want to use their iPod to watch movies on a long flight (you have to turn cell phones off on airplanes remember). I know personally both of the above are true which leaves me with little need/want for the phone portion of the device.

But phone/ipod ties aside, the worst inclusion of them all is Cingular. Because while tons of people love their iPods, I’m willing to bet that they hate cell phone providers even more. Every person I have ever met over the age of about 15 has a serious opinion about providers. They love provider X and despise provider Y, and very very few will ignore those opinions to gain access to a specific phone. Personally, I am of the like Sprint dislike Cingular camp. And as much as I would like an iPhone, I don’t see myself going back to Cingular anytime soon. And I simply dislike Cingular and refuse to switch. Imagine the people who hate Cingular.

So what we are left with is a very niche product. Not only does someone have to want an iPod and phone in one package, they also have to want (or be willing) to put up with Cingular.

[Now how much does this thing cost?]
The iPhone is not cheap. I wouldn’t say that the price is unreasonable, but it also is not cheap and will definitely play a major factor in the adoption rate of the iPhone, or the lack of adoption I believe. As it stands currently, you can get a 4GB iPhone for $499 or an 8GB for $599. Keep in mind that this INCLUDES (there goes those inclusions again) a 2-year contract with Cingular. There has been no price announced to purchase it without a 2-year contract, but if it is similar to typical cell phone deals, you can figure another $200 to buy the phone outright. That is expensive. Very expensive. Too expensive.

The price may not seem bad for some, but to most I think it will be. I know I personally have about $400 worth of electronics in my pocket right now (iPod Nano and LG Fusic), but the difference is that these items were purchased separately. I bought my 4GB iPod Nano ($250) and then some months later bought my LG Fusic ($150). And while the totals are close, the affects the two would have on my financial situation is not. Spending $250 today and $150 in six months is not as financially burdensome as spending $500 tomorrow. This is why I opted to pass on the Treo I really wanted for the LG Fusic that would get the job done.

But what about the fact that you get the iPod AND a phone together? Well, even then the numbers do not seem to add up to me. I can currently get a 4GB Nano for $200 (I’m using the Nano because of its size, not its features. Comparing the iPhone to a $300 video iPod makes the iPhone seem even worse due to the huge difference in capacity), which means I would be spending $300 for just the phone component. That is an expensive phone. And unfortunately for Apple, most people do not have expensive phones. In fact, the only expensive phones I see people with are the ones their company purchased for them. And I know that this phone also includes an OS and other goodies, but really that just won’t matter.

Smart phones, albeit expensive and a touch difficult to use for some, do not sell in big numbers. Why? The cost and the features. Sure, people would like to have extras (calendar, Internet, IM, etc.), but nobody really wants to pay for them. Consider the RAZR. Everyone wanted a slim design phone when it first arrived on the market, but it only started selling once it came down to the $150 price range. Another example is the Treo. It’s a great device that works well, but does not sell in huge numbers due to its price point.

Lastly, you have to consider the cost of Internet access for the phone. And currently, Cingular is charging ~$40/month for unlimited access. That is on top of the normal voice plans. That is expensive. Especially when Sprint is offering unlimited access for less than half that ($15/month). I know this was one of my deciding factors in choosing to drop Cingular as my carrier. And while Cingular’s charges are not necessarily a fault of the phone, the phone is only available on Cingular, so it has to be taken into consideration.

[Who exactly are they marketing this device too?]
If you read the numbers, or walk into an iPod store, the iPods market is predominately people between 12 and 28: teens, college kids, and first generation business folks. This sounds like a huge market, and it is, which is why the iPod has done so well. Unfortunately for Apple, if you look at each segment of the market individually the iPhone is not marketed very well to any of them. In fact, it almost alienates the majority of the typical iPod / cellphone demographic.

Teens: Apple has a lose-lose problem with the teen market. First, most teens do not have cell phone plans of their own. They are bundled with their parent’s plans. Therefore, they get whatever service their parents get. Therefore, having the phone be Cingular exclusive is going to be a problem for the teen demographic unless their parents already have Cingular service. Secondly, parents are not likely to buy their teenage kid a $500 cell phone.

College: The cost of this device is going to be a huge hurdle for the college crowd. Typically, college kids live life on a very tight budget, and while you can visit almost any campus and see kids walking around with iPods, I challenge you to find a handful of college kids walking around with valuable phones (Blackberry’s, Treo’s, etc.). It’s not going to happen. Yes college kids go for style, yes they go for cool, but more than anything they go for price. And $500 out of a students financial aid reimbursement check for the quarter is NOT going to sit well with them.

Business: This has to be Apple’s ideal market because here you have a good amount of middle-aged can’t quite let go of being cool individuals with expendable income (umm, yeah, I guess you could include me in this category minus that last detail). Therefore, this is the demographic most likely to pay premiums for a ‘cool’ device. So what is the problem? The problem for Apple will be that this is also the group likely to have the most definitive opinions about providers. They know who they like, they know who they do not like, and they are willing to pay more to get the service they feel they deserve. So if that individual prefers Verizon, they will stay with Verizon, and purchase a Motorola iAlmost instead of jumping ship or wait until Apple releases the iPhone on Verizon’s network.

[And all of this means...]
In closing, what this means is that while the iPhone is an impressive device, it is unfortunately an extremely niche product that will enjoy an exceptionally slow adoption rate. So while it will be talked about heavily and make other manufacturers rethink their future releases, it won’t be nearly as successful (and thus revolutionary) as the iPod or the mouse (Apple’s other revolutionary products according to Steve). The other two products enjoyed success because they solved problems such as an individuals need to easily navigate a computer or need to transport/listen to tons of music easily, without adding many hurdles. The iPhone however, throws several hurdles in front of its attempts at solving people’s need to combine their phone/music player into one product.

My first stop in my search was Apple’s own Pages. I cannot say that I am entirely impressed with the product, but since it was included as a free-trial with my Macbook, I figured I should at least consider it. As Apple’s first entry into the word processing arena it is not a bad product. It does everything that you would want a word processing program to do (format, bold, italicize, etc.) without including unnecessary and unwanted in-your-face features. I like that. However, that is all it offers. There is no alternative to Excel. So while you could probably get your word processing needs satisfied with Pages, you will still be stuck searching for a place to put your charts and graphs. And since the processing program will run you $79, it is hard to recommend it to anyone. In fact, I would recommend that most people not even bother opening the program in its current state. The program is nice, and has potential, but unfortunately for Apple the $79 price tag unjustifiable considering the Student & Teacher version of Office is only $149.

My next stop is the infamous Open Office. Open Office is supposed to offer a complete and free alternative to Microsoft Office. It includes alternatives for both Word and Excel, as well as some other extras that are useful. So as a package and an idea, Open Office is impressive. However, as a Macintosh application it is frustrating. The program requires that X11 (an Apple application) be installed on your computer before it can function. Installation is relatively easy (pop in your restore CD, check some boxes, and off you go), but the fact that I have to do that is just irritating. In addition, every time you open Open Office, X11 opens. This means that when you go to exit the application, you also have to exit out of X11. And if you accidentally close X11, you will also close Open Office in an unsafe manner and increases the risk of data being lost. A small complaint I know, but it is still irritating enough to keep me from using the program or recommending the program. So while Open Office is by far the most formidable competitor and offers a complete office suite, until they decide to abandon their use of X11, I think it is more of a pain than it is worth.

My third stop was Google’s Docs & Spreadsheets. This particular application is a bit different from the above mentioned as it is completely based online. This is great for people who travel or use several computers (such as myself), as their latest and greatest version is always accessible. And, just like Open Office, Google’s Docs & Spreadsheets is free. It does have its shortcomings though, the biggest of which is that you have to have an account with Google to use it. This is no big deal for me as I already have a gmail account, but I could see it being a significant hurdle for people who have email elsewhere and do not want yet another set of credentials to remember.

As for the actual applications, Google Docs application is very straight forward. You get a text box with a few basic editing options. It also has some advanced functions such as posting to a blog, exporting in PDF or Word format , and collaborative editing. All of these are welcome features, and I particularly like how they are located out of the way and will not interfere with your typing. In fact, I am typing this entry from within Google Doc’s & Spreadsheets right now. My only complaint about the application is that it does not check for correct grammar. It has spell check, but one of my favorite features of Word is its ability to analyze your sentences, find runons, repeat words, or just all around awkwardness, and warn you with a nice green squiggly line. Google’s Docs does not do that. Sad. As a basic word editor though, it functions very well and is available anywhere you have an internet connection. A definite plus for the blogger, student, editor, or professional on the run.

Google’s Spreadsheets application on the other hand, while usable, is not as straight-forward or as complete. The online interface is a bit frustrating to use (clicking in cells, selecting them, etc.), but it is bearable. The problem is that Excel operates like a program while Spreadsheets operates like an online application. So while selecting non-adjacent cells in Excel is relatively easy using the “ctrl” key, doing the same thing online is virtually impossible. This makes formatting much more time consuming as you either have to select a large area by dragging, or select each cell individually. Another limitation is that the applications’ canvas is significantly smaller. You can only have 20 columns and 100 rows. This is a big change from the 250+ columns and 65,000+ rows available in Excel. And while I do not usually use 65,000 rows of data, I do frequently use more than 100.

So in the end, Microsoft Office still rains supreme. While each of the above mentioned applications provide a piece of the overall package, no single application trumps Office in its ease-of-use and thoroughness (Open Office is close, but I really hate the X11 requirement). I should state however that Google Docs has quickly become my word editor of choice. As mentioned, it does not have the bells and whistles that Word has, but the convenience of opening any web browser on any computer and being able to add / edit my work is a priceless convenience that I am growing very fond of. However, Google Spreadsheets has gone almost entirely unused. I just cannot get over the size limitation and slight awkwardness of the user interface. Good thing for me I have an XP machine with Office 2K3 laying around.